Bon, R and Pietroforte, R (1993) New construction versus maintenance and repair construction technology in the US since World War II. Construction Management and Economics, 11(2), pp. 151-162. ISSN 01446193
Abstract
This paper employs seven input–output tables in the comparative study of long-term changes in new and maintenance and repair (M&R) construction technology in the US from 1947 to 1982. The 1982 table was made available in 1991. Input–output analysis is used to show the differences between direct and total input requirements of the two subsectors. Significant differences are reported in terms of backward linkage indicators and output multipliers, as well as direct and total requirements from the key industries supplying the two construction subsectors. As the share of M&R construction in total construction continues to increase, these differences in technology employed by the two subsectors will have an important effect on the national economy as a whole.
| Item Type: | Article |
|---|---|
| Uncontrolled Keywords: | backward linkage indicators; construction technology; input–output analysis; maintenance and repair construction; output multipliers |
| Index terms: | repair, construction technology, war, comparative study, national economy, backward linkage |
| Subjects: | research design and methodology, organizational purchasing, digital engineering, economic analysis, maintenance engineering, conflict and crisis studies |
| Topics: | Research Practice, Procurement, Legal Issues, Digital Applications, Business Strategy |
| Descriptive scope: | 3 PCA |
N.B. Descriptive scope is a count of how many of the five facets of empirical research are indicated by the words used in title, abstract and keywords. It is not intended as a judgement on the research; merely a count of the kind of word we would expect to indicate Phenomenon, Concepts, Theoretical framing, Empirical techniques, Analytical techniques. If all five are present, then a code of “5 PCTEA” will indicate this. If you feel the coding for this record is questionable, we welcome discussion around the terms we matched or the way we categorized them. The facet you would expect may not be coded, or a facet may be coded inappropriately. This can also bear on a larger question, of which facets should be treated as defining in construction management research. Please get in touch, and we will look at it. More details here